The blog will offer purely objective and candid analyses for a better understanding of the events that keep happening and that provide dynamism and direction to the flow of the history and development of the human societies. Being a forum, the comments and opinions from readers whether for or against the views expressed in it, are gratefully welcome. Suggestions for improving the blog are welcome.

Sunday, December 30, 2012

The
formal induction of Bilawal Bhutto Zardari into Pakistan’s murky political turf
took place on the somber occasion of 5th death anniversary of his
mother, former prime minister and chairperson of PPP Mohtrama Benazir Bhutto.
Young and energetic Bilawal delivered his passion-decked debut speech on this
occasion in that he lambasted the judiciary besides assailing certain politicians.
His rhetorical outburst was reminiscent of his grandfather Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s
highly emotional speeches captivating the audience.

But
manifestly his political path is paved with grave odds and unforeseen hazards
and proverbially is strewn with thorns that cannot be picked up so soon to take
him to the garden path of cozy politics. Bilawal Zardari has to go a long way
before he could come to the lofty political heights of his mother and grandfather.

Democratic dynasties are a feature of Asian politics.But in the
backdrop of the ominous and ill- starred legacy of Bhutto family as that of the
Indira Gandhi family in India, one would tend to harbor the troubling apprehensions
about their unscathed survival in politics or power. The political culture both
in India and Pakistan has been hostage to the family based dynastic overlord-ship.
It should be replaced with merit earned through long struggle in the political arena
and by serving the people selflessly and by dint of hard work and moral and political
dignity.

The
iconic political or social figures are certainly adored and loved by their
admirers and fans. But this mindset should not turn into a psychological urge on
the part of the leaders to undermine the national interests and principled politics.
This kind of hero worship in prevalent in Pakistan because of a feudal system
that survives on absolute obedience, clannish bonds as well as the slavish mentality from the common folks mostly
bonded labor and farm workers.

Also the
shrine culture has spawned the docility and reverence for the self-styled
divine figures and for those who claim to have directed access with the powers
that rule and run the universe. These intermediaries or so to say religious or
mystical solicitors command limitless veneration and unquestionable submission
from their followers and disciples who remain unmindful of their self dignity
and honor.

We have
to therefore, discard and reject this mentality of abject cronyism and servitude
demanded by the privileged individuals or families in the spiritual or political
domains. The democracy cuts across the parochial, clannish, and narrow considerations
and urges, and instead gives ascendancy to the people who in fact, are the real
owners of the power vested in a few individuals.

Earlier Pakistan’s
incumbent president Asif Ali Zardari, who is also the acting chairman of the
ruling party PPP, has indicated many a time that Asifa Zardari Bhutto would
lead the party and carry forward the vision of her deceased mother, her grandfather
and founder of the PPP Zulfikar Ali Bhutto.

However,
following the assassination of Mohtrama Benazir Bhutto, Bilawal was appointed
as the chairman of the party with a new name: Bilawal Bhutto Zardari. It was a
shrewd move on the part of Asif Zardari to integrate two clans, namely Bhutto
and Zardari into one male successor thus crafting a semblance of unity and
togetherness of the two tribes. He wanted Bilawal to represent Bhutto family to
negate dissensions within the party.

Bilawal
was named chairman of the PPP in December 2007. Zardari planned to serve as a
co-chairman of the PPP for at least three years until Bilawal completed his
studies overseas. Although Bilawal returned to Pakistan in 2011, and is a de-facto
chairman of PPP, Mr. Zardari presumably plans to hold reins of the party till
such time as Bilawal is mature enough to take charge of the party as its
full-fledged functional head. That moment has perhaps arrived now.

Surprisingly,
while it was a foregone and a settled matter that the next chairman to lead the
party is Bilawal, all of a sudden, Asif Ali Zardari started propping up Asifa
as the PPP’s leader and an intelligent successor of late Benazir Bhutto. Asifa
who is now 19 years of age is being invited to various state functions held at
the president’s house and at the prime minister’s residence. But presumably
Asif Zardari has again modified his plans by recalculating that a male was better
than a female to lead the party.

It should
be recollected that when Asif Ali Zardari entered the presidential residence
for the first time, he was ensconced on both sides by his two daughters Asifa
and Bakhtawar. While initially Bakhtawar (22 years) was being bolstered, later
she went into oblivion and was substituted by Asifa for making certain statements
about her family, her vision, perceptions and aims with regard to the future of
Pakistan and the party.

When
president Zardari left for Dubai for his heart surgery, Bilawal Bhutto came to
Pakistan. But he remained non vocal and reticent without issuing any
substantive statements. He looked subdued and seemed to be in a state of
introspection or introversion.

At that
time, his visibly sluggish posture or quiet demeanor as reflected from his body
chemistry could be due to the illness of his father or the lurking feeling that
his father was heaped with a plethora of accusations or allegations one of
which was that he could be also be instrumental in the assassination of Benazir
Bhutto. He could also nurse a kind of forlorn feeling that why all of a sudden
his sister was being promoted by his father as the prospective leader of the
party and that finally the reins of the party could be handed over to Asifa.

But more
potent reason could be his disenchantment with politics and like her aunt Sanam
Bhutto; he might not like to delve in politics under paranoia of being the
target of the elements that killed his mother. Or maybe by virtue of his
temperament he is not attuned to getting into the political arena and instead
prefers to lead a private life. It could also be possible that father and son
might have developed some yet to be revealed differences on matters exclusively
privy to them.

But perhaps
now Bilawal seems to have come of age and can be accepted more willingly by the
PPP cadres. Compared to his father who is heaped in myriad scandals and allegations,
such acceptance would flow from his having a clean slate and also for being the
direct descendent of the daughter of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto.

Patently,
these are all speculations. But notwithstanding the internal feuding within the
family for ascendency in the party hierarchy, a keen observer of Pakistan’s misty
politics would strongly argue that the leadership of the PPP should not be
passed on to a member of the Bhutto family.

Firstly,
it would be negation or deviation from the established principle of electing a
leader from among the cadres. If the PPP is going to be the family property
then its democratic credentials would remain questionable and its legitimacy as
the national party would remain clouded.

Secondly,
the progeny of Ms Bhutto might not be as competent as were their mother and
grandfather. The Bhutto legacy is certainly a cherished and romantic phenomenon
for the steadfast Bhuttoite, so called jialas (die-hard fans) and devotees of
Bhutto family. Nevertheless, the ground realities of the political turf in
Pakistan are, rough, unpredictable and uncharitable.

The
raison d’être for this assertion is that the PPP needs to re-establish its
popular image as a party of the masses managed by a brand of leadership that is
clean, upright and democratically hoisted in the hierarchy of the party. It
would be a tall order for all the three children of Benazir Bhutto to lead PPP
at a much younger age when it is faced with monumental challenge of
refurbishing its bruised image.

The party
needs to motivate and reunite the cadres disillusioned with the corruption of
its stalwarts especially Asif Ali Zardari who cannot come clean even if he
endeavors to prove himself as an honest person for his whole life.

As for
the children of Ms Bhutto, they would always, like their mother, remain
vulnerable for their personal safety, and thus restrained from freedom of
movement and speech. During the past decade or so, the free movement and open
door politicking of the political and religious leaders have come under severe
containment and rigorous restrictions.

If Bhutto
family is the repository of an unsurpassed fame, immense esteem and eminence,
they have foes and adversaries too. It should not be overlooked that four
celebrated figures of the Bhutto family were murdered, with the founder of the
family hanged through a fake and farcical judicial process.

It would
be befitting to allude to the Nehru family that was as much loved and venerated
in India as that of Bhutto family in Pakistan. One of the globally known
strongest female head of a government, Indira Gandhi was assassinated by two of
her Sikh bodyguards in October 1984.

Her
assassination was viewed as an act of vengeance against Indira for ordering
“operation blue star “in June 1984, entailing massacre of thousands of Sikhs.
Her two sons also subsequently perished. Sanjay Gandhi was killed in a flying
accident in 1980. The second Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi was assassinated in
Tamil Nadu (May 1991) in a suicide bombing carried out by Liberation Tigers of Tamil
Elam.

It was a
sagacious decision on the part of Rajiv’s widow Sonia Gandhi to remain in the
background although she could have become the prime minister of India on the
drop of the hat. She was well aware that she could be targeted as well. As such
she has remained safe, as well as in a dominant position of leading her party
and influencing the government with her decisions.

Rahul
Gandhi, the son of late Rajiv and Sonia Gandhi has been kicking around in the
political arena to begin with, but was perhaps prevailed upon by his well
wishers and more by his mother to not challenge the traditional rivals as the
scion of Gandhi family. He seems to have understood the message and is now
modestly conducting himself that would be tolerable for both friends and foes.
His position as the general secretary of the Indian National Congress and
member of Lok Sabha is harmless. But the moment he would aspire for a higher
status he could encounter threats to his life.

Politics
is rather becoming a tough undertaking and a harrowing ordeal for traditional
political families particularly in the third world countries. The people are
now more politically conscious and want a free run for everyone to aspire and
compete for top slots either within the party or in the government. If the
families continue to occupy the parties’ pinnacle positions, then it stifles
the spirit of free contest that is central to a democratic culture.

Unfortunately
in several countries around the world, the politics and parties are known by a
few individuals who founded the parties and then assume father figure or iconic
status. These leaders maintain their overlord-ship until a stupendous shake-up
within the party or in the political waters of the country casts them or their
family successors away.

It is
quite an objective approach by Sanam Bhutto, the younger sister of Benazir to
keep away from the quagmires of politics in Pakistan. Perhaps she is not as
brave or as ambitious as Benazir was. But understandably, what made her averse
to politics is the tragic end of her family members that she does not want for
herself.

Curiously,
the profile or life sketch of Asifa and Bakhtawar can nowhere be found in
chronicles or information channels such as face book, you-tube or Wikipedia or
other similar blogs. All the information is either blocked or blacked out for
fear of slanderous, mischievous and vicious backlash. We have come across
comments in face book between the messengers that are dirty and diabolic and
are dished out by culturally dwarfed people.

But while
this is a prudent way of escaping the malignant and distasteful interactions,
it closes the doors and avenues of wider publicity that are absolutely
essential for the politicians and those who wish to tread upon the
unpredictable and deceptive field of politics. Yet it depends as to what course
one would like to adopt: stay in politics and face odds or steer clear and
enjoy a safe private life.

Thursday, December 27, 2012

Muslims as religious entity have never been united, nor can there
possibly be one brand of Islam ever. The irreconcilable conflict between Sunnis
and Shias is a pernicious spillover from the past precisely from the moment
Prophet of Islam Hazrat Muhammad (SAW) breathed his last. The ongoing orgy of
blood and mutual killings in Pakistan is not a new phenomenon. It has been
there for centuries wherever Muslims societies existed. It is a colossal
tragedy within Islam that this great faith is torn apart into two domains that
cannot reconcile or converge on a common creed.

The issue of succession after the demise of the prophet has
been the bane of the unity among the Muslims for all these 14 centuries. Never
was there an Islamic issue than the caliphate which brought so much of destruction
and bloodshed between two leading sects of Sunnis and Shias. It is still a
living issue prompting both sides to spill each others’ blood with religious
fervor. In the present times in Syria, the civil war that has consumed 40000
people is primarily between Shia Alawi minority rulers and the majority Sunni
population.

The prophet did not nominate a successor during his
lifetime. The prophet’s death provoked a crisis. He died without any male
progeny and without a clearly designated successor. Although, the prophet
remained indisposed for several days before his death and he had plenty of time to
decide as to who would be his successor, he did not take that vital decision.
It was during his last moments that he wanted to dictate his will and nominate
his successor. But those who were around his bed did not write the will because
the prophet was in a state of faintness.

Following the demise of the prophet, the impromptu decision
by a few of his close companions chose Abu Bakr as his successor as the first
caliph. That led to a conflict between the prophet’s own family of Banu Hashim
and the traditionally rival clan of Banu Ummayd. That nomination was not
accepted by prophets’ family headed by his son in law, cousin brother and later
the fourth caliph Hazrat Ali. The first three caliphs were from not from the
Banu Hashim tribe.

Shiite Muslims believe that the true leadership comes
through the Prophet’s bloodline and that his cousin and son in law
Ali-ibne-Abi-Talib was the divinely ordained successor. They claim that Allah
and his prophet had clearly designated Ali as the only legitimate successor.
The Sunni sects believe that the four successors of Prophet Muhammad or caliphs
were legitimate as they were chosen by the community in accordance with the
custom of those times. The supporters of Ali always looked up for an
opportunity to see Ali as the caliph. But their wishes and endeavors were
blunted by the more crafty and powerful Ummyad notables.

However, the murder of the third caliph Hazrat Usman by the
pro Ali supporters known as Kharjis intensified the rivalry between the prophet’s
family and the Ummyad tribe. After Hazrat Osman, Hazrat Ali took the
mantle of caliphate (656-661 C. E.). The deprivation of Ali of the office of
the caliph through arbitration and later his death divided the Muslims into two
irreconcilable groups forever. When Hazrat Usman was murdered, one of the
mourners predicted that the cleavage caused by his assassination would never be
bridged till the doomsday. That prophecy holds true to this day.

This cleavage further sharpened when Imam Hussain, his
entire family (excepting women and one male) and accompanying followers were massacred
in the desert of Karbala near Baghdad by the troops of then Ummayd caliph
Yazid, the son of the founder of Ommyad dynasty; Amir Muawiyah. Yazid to Shias is like a devil while Sunnis
treat him like other caliphs. The Islamic unity has therefore, remained a mere
myth and elusive goal for all these fourteen centuries.

Although there are several scores of sects and denominations
within the fold of Islam, the level of animosity and bitterness that exists
between the two leading sects of Sunnis and Shias is horrendous. There is no way
that their doctrinal rift can be healed and reconciled in any way.

The Shia and Sunni division in Islam is so drastic and hard
that they do not pray together in one place. Shias do not pay Islamic tax Zakat
while in Islam it is considered to be one of the five principle obligations.
With the exception of a few common beliefs and traditions Shias and Sunnis
differ on a whole range of beliefs with regard to Sharia laws encompassing both
juridical( criminal and civil) and ecclesiastical. The Shias believe in a
lineage of twelve divine imams or spiritual leaders. On the other side, besides
four caliphs, Sunnis have four Imams but they are primarily interpreters of the
Islamic Sharia law. Barring Ali, Shias discard the three caliphs as usurpers.

The Islamic history is replete with their mutual
annihilation and massacres. In the past, the Sunni and Shia dynasties have
been taking turns for wreaking havoc upon each other. During the Shia dynasties
in Egypt, North Africa, Sicily,
Spain, ArabianPeninsula, Syria
and Iraq, Iran & Azerbaijan Sunnis have been terribly persecuted.

Conversely, in Sunni Muslim dynasties, Shias had suffered
with terrible discrimination and massacres. The sack and pillage of Baghdad in
1258 by the Mongol hordes was the result of the rivalry between a Sunni caliph
Mustaasim and a Shia vizier Mohammad bin al-Kami. Kami invited the Tartars to
come to Baghdad.

While in the past they killed each other with swords, in the
present times they resort to mutual slaughter by suicide bombing, target
killing and bomb blasts. The Shias are branded as infidels by the majority
Sunni sects and therefore, their murder is justifiable to them as if they were
killing a non-Muslim. In Islam a heretic or apostate person or sect is more
condemnable and liable to be punished with death than a non-Muslim who has
clear denomination of not being a Muslim faithful and has come under the
protection of the state as a Zimmi or dhimmi.

In all the Middle Eastern Islamic regimes there is always a
simmering tussle, between the Sunni and Shia populations. For instance in
Bahrain, the Sunnis are in minority but ruling. Conversely in Syria the Sunnis
are in majority and Shias are in minority but are at the political helm. Same
division and cleavage prevails in Iraq where most of the Shias religious and
spiritual leaders are buried

One dimension of the Arab spring is the upswing in the ideological
conflict between Sunnis and Shias in Iraq, Bahrain and Syria where it is now
turning into a civil war. In Iraq from the early days of Islam to Saddam
Hussain’s era to the present dispensation of prime minister Nouri-al-Maliki, the Sunni-Shia feud has always been mostly underneath the
societal disorders and internal upheavals.

In Bahrain the minority Sunni regime is in place while in
Syria, it is the Shia minority that is at the helm and wreaking all brutalities
on the Sunnis. Presently in Baghdad the Sunni majority population is protesting
against the Shia minority government for maltreatment and discrimination.

In Pakistan, the Shia community observes the martyrdom of
Imam Hussain, the grandson of the prophet of Islam, in a nerve-racking environment.
They enter their congregational places as if entering a nuclear arsenal. Each
and every person is subjected to body pat down by the security staff posted at the
entry and exit points. The entire country is placed under high alert with
thousands of military and semi military personnel guarding the processions. Still the suicide bombers, callous murderers
and sharp shooters from their rival sects keep killing them. Practicing of
one’s faith is becoming extremely arduous in Islamic polities.

In the present times Saudi Arabia and Iran are hostile competitors
in upholding the Sunni and Shia creeds respectively. The Saudis are aligned to
the Christian West and America to browbeat and even contain the growing
leverage and influence of Iran in the region. This antagonism is entirely faith
based besides the historical rivalry between the Arab and non-Arab Muslims
(Ajam). Some of the Shia spiritual leaders migrated to Iran during the Ommyad
and Abbasids dynasties while the others were killed by these powerful family fiefdoms.
As such the discord between Shias and Sunnis is not only of faith but also regional,
ethnic and political.

The unity of Muslims as one nation would always remain a
myth and unattainable goal. The bridging of the doctrinal and theological
chasms between these two main sects within Islam would always remain a tall
order unless the Muslim clergy of both the sects reconcile on living in harmony
despite their mutual differences of faith and Sharia laws. Would that be
possible within an Islamic state cannot be fathomed.

However, if the Islamic polities turn secular wherein all faiths
are allowed to practice freely without harming each other, this most coveted
goal can become attainable. The example
of such religious harmony can be witnessed in western societies where they pray
in the same mosques and never fight.

Sunday, December 23, 2012

MQM’s chief custodian and uncrowned king Altaf Hussain,
of late, appears to have landed in a deep trouble. He is presumably faced with
a double jeopardy. He has come under suspicion of his connection with Dr. Imran Farooq’s
murder. Secondly he has picked up a row with the Supreme Court of Pakistan on
delimitation of constituencies.

The investigation
of Dr. Imran Farooq has, of late, assumed new twists and turns.
The London Metropolitan Police has stepped up the investigation about the
murder of the Dr. Imran Farooq, a former colleague and friend
of Altaf Hussain. Imran Farooq a one-time celebrity and
leading light of MQM was murdered in mysterious circumstanceson September16, 2010, outside his home at Green Lane,
Edgeware in North London. Dr Imran Farooq had co-founded
the All Pakistan Muhajir Students Organization (APMSO), and also had
been the deputy convener of the party.

It was after almost a lull of two years, that the Metropolitan
Police, in connection with Dr. Imran’s murder, raided the business office of Altaf Hussain in Edgeware and
conducted comprehensive search for two days. The intensive search was the
follow up action of the various pieces of vital evidence and important tips
that the London police was able to collect since 2010.

It was also reported that although several persons were
interrogated yet no arrests were made. British High Commissioner in
Pakistan Adam Thomson also confirmed in a statement that Dr. Imran Farooq was
a British national and their police was investigating a murder of its
citizen.

The second jeopardy came as a backlash of his stunning remarks
directed at the Supreme Court in which he argued that “that delimitation of
electoral constituencies was not the job of the courts, and it would not help
the cause of peace”. He obliquely warned that “those who were trying to hatch
conspiracies against the MQM would be eliminated.”

In response to his threatening outburst, the Supreme Court
retaliated by issuing a contempt of court notice to him with orders to appear
in the court and explain his point of view. Understandably he cannot come to
Pakistan and thus there might be more retaliation from the Supreme Court.

It has been observed in various media columns that he stands a
frightening chance of losing his residency in England due to his stinging
remarks about the supreme court of Pakistan. A senior Pakistan-born and
England- based lawyer Sibgatullah Qadri stated that if a foreign
court convicts a British citizen against contempt charges, the British
government can terminate the citizenship rights of such individual. He asserted
that in Britain the contempt of court is considered as serious a crime as
murder and is not taken lightly.

Altaf Hussain sneaked
out of Pakistan one month before the launching of the Operation Clean-up (June
19, 1992 to August 14, 1994). His flight from Pakistan also was the
result of an attempt on his life on 21 December 1991 that was the third of its
kind. He was given political asylum by the British government and is staying
there since then.

Altaf Hussain founded
All Pakistan Muhajir Student Organization”APMSO in June 1978 that was
later renamed as Muhajir Qaumi Movement (MQM) in March 1984. It
was finally renamed as Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) in June
1997.

Altaf Hussain with
a mercurial and audacious temperament has been issuing statements that cut
across the two nation ideology thus denunciating the creation of
Pakistan. In one such statement he is recorded to have said that,

“Division
of the subcontinent was the biggest blunder in the history of mankind and Nehru
and Abdul Kalam Azad are responsible for it because they
rejected that grouping formula and greater autonomy for Muslim majority
province of India. If they accepted it then Jinnah would have never demanded
separate Pakistan and Jinnah was ready for co-exist within India.”

Altaf Hussain was
having 3576 cases for various charges against him. But all the cases were
dropped under the National Reconciliation Ordinance issued by the
former President of Pakistan, General Pervez Musharraf, on 5
October 2007.

Wednesday, December 19, 2012

In his press
conference on gun violence in the Brady Press Briefing Room at the White House
Washington, the President Obama was pensive, stunning, and articulate. He appeared
heartbroken, grieved yet serene, somber and earnest. Although in the aftermath
of Newtown elementary school massacre, the press conference was meant, to unfurl
an action plan and urgent measures to rein in the erratic and free-for-all gun culture,
yet most questions were asked about the fiscal cliff by the journalists.

He discarded the usual tradition and recourse to constitute a
commission for finding ways and means to lessen the disastrous ramification of
use of assault weapons and high powered guns. Instead he demonstrated his sense
of urgency and seriousness in resolving this tricky issue by announcing a task force
with a time frame of one month for presentation of report to control the gun violence.

In the backdrop of
the horrendous massacre at the Newtown Elementary School, the president seemed
to be totally resolved and serious about containing the unbridled gun culture
in the United Stated. The gun owners derive their right to buy, own and use the
guns under the second amendment of the American constitution. While expressing his
belief in the inviolability of the Second Amendment, he opined that without
amending the amendment, the laws could be framed to curb the violence and stop manslaughter
by the irresponsible and mentally sick persons.

The president assigned this extremely crucial task to his
most trusted confidant, the vice president Josef Biden. Within a time frame of one month or so, Mr.
Biden would formulate a well-thought out strategy and set of proposals to
enforce ban on assault weapons, put limit on
ammunition and to ensure background checks at the gun shows. Vice
president Biden has worked for years in the senate for legislation to check the
proliferation and abuse of the guns and assault weapons in the United State.

The complete gun control is going to be a difficult task but
in the wake of the gruesome tragedy of Newtown School, where a young boy killed
28 persons including 20 small children, there is a strong possibility that he
would be able to get these laws passed by the legislators. Also he exuded the possibility
of obtaining the consent of the gun stake holders one of which is the National
Rifle Association (NRA).

The President’s determination to address this vital issue looks
unwavering to bring about concrete results to restrain the wanton use of lethal
weapons for killing the Americans by crazy individuals. That is why he is not
in favor of making a commission to look into this urgent issue.

He
asserted that in his drive against the uninhibited use of weapons,
members of his cabinet and outside organizations would be involved.
Besides, the departments of Justice, Education, Health and Human Services, and
Homeland Security would also join the process.

Whether the Republicans’
dominated House would be willing to lend a helping hand to the president’s
vital initiative would be laid bare once the report of the task force is
finalized and tables before the two houses of the Congress for approval.

President Obama wants to capitalize on the anti-gun environment generated by
the heat wrenching New Town School massacre that is the latest one in the series
of such gruesome carnages by the callous murders having free access to the mass-killing
firearms. President pointed that if they did not like to cooperate with me let
them do it for the sake of the people who deserve protection from such horrific
tragedies.

Saturday, December 15, 2012

The
tragic death of 26 fellow Americans including 20 children between the ages of
6-7 is an unspeakable tragedy. It is a mini holocaust that would haunt the
parents and relations of the victims, no one knows how long. The 20 year old killer Adam Lanza first
killed his 52 year old mother before gunning down the children in two first-grade classrooms, of
Sandy Hook elementary School in the Sandy Hook village of Newtown Connecticut.

The
second gruesome massacre in educational institutions is known as theVirginia
Tech massacre in which 32 people were killed and 17
woundedin two separate
attacks. It took place on April 16, 2007, on the campus ofVirginia Polytechnic Institute and State UniversityinBlacksburg,
Virginia, United States. The shooter’s name was Seung-Hui Cho who also killed himself.
In the recent past several shooting incidents took place in the shopping malls
and public places.

On July 20, 2012, one such horrific mass shooting occurred inside the Centurymovie
theaterinAurora,
Colorado. The
perpetrator James Eagan Holmes set offtear gasgrenades and shot into the audience with multiple firearms,
killing 12 people and injuring 58 others.

Now all these ghastly incidents of carnage bring home
the absolute urgency of curbing or controlling the firearms that are so abundantly
and ubiquitously available in the United States. Anyone can walk into a gun store
and buy at will, the weapons ranging from ordinary revolvers to deadly assault weapons. The fire-arms are purchased by the people for a variety of reasons. First it is
the psyche of possessing arms that has almost become a fashion or propensity with
the people with financial ability to buy the costliest weapons. Keeping assault
weapons are also deemed to be status symbols.

Secondly there is running paranoid of self protection
against the invisible or fantasy intruders at the properties. Thirdly there are
hunters that prey upon the animals like deer, antelopes, alligators bears,
birds etc, for the sake of fun or making money. There are gun shows where the weapon
crazy people throng and buy all kind of weapons whose lethal capacity goes beyond
the protections against burglars or trespassers.

It has been observed that not a fraction of all
these deadly weapons are used for the protection of the inmates of a household
or for driving away the unwanted intruders. There have been negligible number
of incidents in which a courageous house owner or ranch keeper used the gun to
kill a shady character or to scare away the suspect poaching the property.

On the contrary what happens is that the mentally
deranged, psychopaths, trigger-happy shooters, the disgruntled individuals and
the avengers use such weapons for manslaughter and pogroms of the people. As
such the possession of assault and ordinary weapons seem to have become counter-productive
and least used for the purpose these are acquired.

The second amendment in the American constitution
permits the citizens to bear arms. This
caveat as we all witness is violated for wrongful and insidious objectives. The
time when this amendment was passed was socially unstable and dangerous. This
amendment would have served the purpose during those times when people felt insecure
and needed to defend themselves from the enemies or the soldiers who would forcibly
occupy the priorities or there were dangerous predators hovering around.

In those
fearsome times, there was a genuine need for the citizens to protect themselves
as the law and order institutions were still in the making and not very effective.
The responsibility to ward off the attackers or intruders, thieves and burglars
devolved on the individuals mostly. Moreover, the permission to bear arms was part
of a package of civil liberties by overlooking the possibility, that in future, these could
become more deadly and destructive.

Therefore there is a dire need to bring about
necessary amendments in the constitution to restrict buying of arms only by
those who can keep them in safe custody. The laws pertaining to the licensing
and purchase of weapons must be absolutely stringent and hard so that only the genuine
people can have them. There is also an urgent need to maintain the names and particulars
of the buyers with conditions that no one else not even their family members
could have access to these.

The neighborhood patrols by the vigilantes,
watchdogs and police should be enhanced so that the people feel less threatened
and have less desire or necessity to keep the guns in the house to meet any
untoward eventuality. Rather facing themselves with a deadly weapons they
should be able to call the police to deal with any dangerous situation.

The gun shows should be banned or curtailed.
These should be held under strict watch of the law enforcement agencies and records
should be meticulously maintained as to who is buying and what kind of weapons
was being traded. The uninhibited trade of dangerous weapons at such shows
should be completely abolished.

The underlying objective of a constitutional amendment
with regard to the buying or possessing of arms should be to stop these from
going into the wrong hands. It should be made mandatory for the guns to be used
only by the license holder and no one else. Moreover, the number of weapons
should be fixed according to the nature of one’s status. For a private individual it could be single low
caliber weapon and for official duties it could be more. The modelities of such
restrictions or permissions can be worked out by the specialists and experts.

Sunday, December 9, 2012

Egypt’s
newly elected president and former chairman of the Freedom and Justice Party
(FJP) might have mistakenly taken it for granted that his decree to immunize
his decisions from the legal oversight and interference may not evoke mammoth
protests rallies, now rife in Egypt. The FJP is an offshoot of the Muslim
Brotherhood.

President
Morsi took this decision under the apprehension that once again the Supreme Constitutional
Court (SCC) of Egypt may dissolve the parliament before the ratification of the
drafted constitution. It would be worth recalling that on 14 June 2012, the SCAF
(the Supreme Council of Armed Forces) dissolved the parliament at the
recommendation of the Supreme
Constitutional Court of Egypt. The judges have been the appointees of Hosni Mubarak.

On 8 July 2012 President Morsi through a decree reinstated
the dissolved constituent assembly till such time as the new constitution was
passed by the parliament and ratified through a referendum.The Supreme Constitutional Court however,
called that decree into question on 9 July 2012.

It was
in this background that president Morsi revoked the SCC prerogative to
challenge his decisions. President Morsi apprehended that before the assembly
could pass the constitution it may be dissolved again by the SCC. For him to
get out of this tricky imbroglio was to make himself immune from any legal
action. Morsi claimed that the
decree was issued to prevent the courts from dissolving the Constitutional
Assembly.

He asserted that equipping himself with unlimited
powers was to “protect” the nation,and to legislatewithout
judicial oversight or review of his acts. By a
referendum he wants to push through Egypt's newly approved draft constitution
that was fundamentally based on Islamic Sharia. Morsi’s political opponents
have described his decree an unwarranted and unusual attack on the independence
of the judiciary.

The
massive protests are reminiscent of those that were staged against the former president
Hosni Mubarak and that resulted in his ouster from the power. While the anti-
Mubarak protests were also joined rather spearheaded by the Muslim Bortherhood
cadres, the anti- Morsi agitation in Cairo’s Tehrir square are being
participated by pro-democratic
liberals, leftists,secularists, Christians, and
Mubarak supporters.

Now it appears that the situation in Egypt is
getting unwieldy for FJP. The huge protests of the Egyptian people are not exclusively
against Morsi’s amassing absolute powers. The protesters apprehend that the new
constitution passed by the constituent assembly will not be secular and liberal
and instead pave way for the imposition of rigid Islamic Sharia law. That would
be another kind of theocratic dictatorship although in sheer contrast to Hosni Mubarak’s
secular dictatorship, supported by the armed forces.

There seems to be no let up in the fast
escalating mammoth wave of protests not only in Cairo but in other Egyptian
cities. The grave situation remains stalemated despite president Morsi’s offer
to the opposition for a dialogue and promise to annul his decree after the
passage of the constitution and holding of referendum. President Morsi seems to
be caught unaware and under sheer self-assuring misunderstanding that he would
sail through the rough water smoothly.

Now the tumultuous situation is extremely dicey.
The opposition would not let him off the hook so easily. Either he will have to
withdraw his decree or resign. If he withdraws his decree then the specter of
dissolution of the assembly would remain dangling over his government’s head. The
SCC may once again declare presidential decree as unconstitutional and reorder
holding of fresh elections. The military not very friendly towards the FJP and
Muslim Brotherhood government may put its weight behind the legal ruling.

Either way Morsi will have to give in. By
withdrawing the decree he would be immensely weakened politically. If he holds on
to his ground and pushes through for approval of the new constitution in the reinstated
constituent assembly, the protest would get further fierce and bloody. That
ugly situation may once again prompt the army to step in and roll up the
democratic turf. In this speculated eventuality Egypt would be back to square
one. The pro democracy protesters would again come to Tehrir square against the
army rule.

The army may again announce for the new elections
as the incumbent assembly would remain dissolved and a new one would have to be
chosen. If the Muslim Brotherhood government is forced out of power, its rank
and file would whip up more aggressive and violent agitations pushing Egypt
towards a dreadful disorder and instability or a civil war.

Monday, December 3, 2012

Pakistan
has remained in the throe of a perennial multi-faceted crisis. But let us not despair
about its destiny and a glorious future ahead. Pakistan a nascent state has
remained caught in myriad problems ever since it came into being on August 14,
1947. These problems are both internal and external. A new nation under an
inept and self-seeking leadership remained lost and distracted from its course
of moving forward to progress, prosperity, and stability. Pakistan’s dilemma is
that its leadership that created and struggled for Pakistan did not live long
enough to set the parameters that could have transformed it into a vibrant and
viable state.

In the
modern times, Pakistan and India’s emergence as two independence states is a
unique phenomenon that has few parallels in the history. Both the
sub-continental states were the result of a sustained movement for independence
kept in high gear by Muslim and Hindu leaders. For a variety of undeniable
factors and divergent dynamics, these two communities could not opt to live
together in one united state.

Immediately
after partition of the British India; Pakistan was beset with refugees’ problem
and the settlement of the incoming immigrants from the territories that became
part of India. This country fell into the hands of the nasty bureaucrats who
were averse to making a constitution and embarking Pakistan upon a democratic
course. The intriguing politicians, whose predominant lot came from the feudal
classes, hijacked the political power and until this day are overt or covert
power brokers and wielders. With the feudal culture still rampant and dominant,
the democracy seems to be tainted and hijacked.

The
perennial Kashmir issue has given ascendancy to the armed forces as the savior
of the nation although it was during the military rules that Pakistan suffered
ruinous setbacks and detrimental downfalls. As is commonly known, the first
military ruler Gen (how could he become Field Marshall)AyubKhan deprived Pakistan of three
rivers, lending a devastating blow to Pakistan’s agricultural based economy.YahyaKhan truncated Pakistan. GenZiaulburied a democratic government, hanged
an elected prime minster, promoted religious extremism and sectarian animus,
and turned Pakistan into a mercenary hatchet man of the foreign
imperialism.

Finally,
Gen Musharraf played havoc with the constitution of Pakistan. He consolidated
his power by manipulating with self-preserving amendments in the constitution
and pushing Pakistan further into the lap of foreign hegemonic designs and
reinforcing Pakistan’s mercenary role.

Now this
is history. With the popular elections in February 2008, Pakistan has been set
on a new democratic path after almost ten years of one-man rule, and 32 years
of cumulative military domination of Pakistan. Despite the ferocious and
unrelenting insurgency and frequent suicide bombing, Pakistan is doing well
with the rest of the world and at home.

The
religious based militancy that is apace for a decade or so would have
challenged the authority of state at some juncture. The thorns of sectarian and
ethnic bad blood that Gen Zia had sown have been growing into full-scale
stature. It was foregone that eventually, the extremism within both Pakistan or
of external import would descend upon Pakistan with full fury.

Pakistan
could not have saved itself from the fanaticism of the religious militants
after their victory in Afghanistan.

Logically
they would have come home with more victories with a view to establishing an
Islamic orthodox system (caliphate) of government in both Afghanistan and
Pakistan. I doubt if Pakistan or Afghanistan governments or societies could
hold their advance and check their unrelenting sway as was later witnessed in
Swat and northern valleys.

It is
here that the American and NATO forces’ presence in this region, to curb and
weaken these merciless brigands, looks useful. Therefore, in a way the military
might of NATO and of the United States to browbeat religious frenzy and
militancy has been a kind of blessing in disguise for Pakistan.

Eventually
the occupation forces will have to leave Afghanistan. So primarily, it would be
both Pakistan and Afghanistan that would benefit from the weakening and
bludgeoning of Taliban and Al-Qaidawho could have turned this region into
a hell engaging Pakistan army into a perpetual conflict. If there are people,
who believe that Taliban would revive Islamic glory and pristine caliphate are morons
and so to speak, living in fools’ paradise. If Taliban turn Pakistan into
another Swat and Kabul, would we call it a genuine Islamic government?

Notwithstanding
the personal objectionable character or the villainous volition of the
individuals in power in Pakistan, the fact cannot be ignored that it is
essentially an elected government. Still it is a democratic dispensation that
is subject to some semblance of accountability and censure as exercised by
media and judiciary. Gradually and imperceptibly the economy is showing
resilience and revival, howsoever feeble and slow it may be.

Already
the incumbent government would be completing almost five years its
constitutional tenure by February 2013. Let it continue for a few more months and
leave it to the the people to reelect them in the next elections or cast them
away in favor of new praetorian. The courts are relatively freer and so are
the media and the civil society.

There is
a barrage of problems for majority of Pakistan’s populace. The poverty, the
insecure life, the shortage of water and power, the corruption, the unemployment,
the red tape, the inadequacy ofsocio-civic services, the environmental
degradation, and the appalling cost of living are some of the horrendous
problems that afflict Pakistan. However, these problems were still there when a
military junta was in power.

So by
comparison a democratic government, howsoever, flawed is decidedly better than
a stultifying military rule that gags freedom and rules by coercion. In the
present set up, at least you can express and voice your grievances and
problems. In an authoritarian system, one risks your honor, life and freedom by
opposing or dissenting.

My vision
is that Pakistan despite its countless problems including the oft-repeated
skepticism about its viability and survival will stay its course and eventually
move steadfastly on the way to becoming a modern state with all attending
hallmarks. The women are more empowered now, the civil society is in the
making, and democratic culture is taking roots.

There is
some kind of accountability although the executive has not moved fast to
address the law and order and similar grave issues. A stage would arrive when
civil society would be vibrant enough to press for dire action against the
defaulters, outlaws, delinquents, bribe-takers, thugs, public enemies and so.

Instead
of condemning or berating the government for every major and minor fault, let
us see it in a broader context. At least it is being run by the people’s
elected representatives. Let us strive and wish that the incumbent government
can move away from its mistakes and follies, corrects its rudder, and drives
the country out of dire straits. The worst democracy is better than the best dictatorship,
goes the adage.

The
political parties can establish their credentials as the redeemers of the nation
and builders of a new Pakistan that could be prosperous, safe, strong, and with
efficient institutions. The leaders of the respective fleet of parties should
present their manifestos, vision and programs for the service of the nation and
grandeur of Pakistan and to transform it into a stable and viable state.

They can
do for so till May next year when the elections are scheduled to be held. The statement
of PMNL chief Mian Nawaz Sharif connotes positive and conciliatory undertones
in that he offered to have a working relationship with president Zardari because
of his being the constitutional head of the state.

The belligerency,
brinkmanship and mere inane sloganeering is not going to drive away the maladies
and misfortunes that overcast Pakistan. With a new democratic set up, the
country would be moving forward since it would be for the first time for a
smooth and democratic transfer of power to the elected representatives of the
people of Pakistan.

The
example of Egypt is instructive for Pakistani leadership. Egypt has been
blessed with an elected popular government after several decades of autocratic rule.
Incumbent ruling party the Muslim brotherhood was banned in Egypt for decades.
Not it is the legitimate choice of the Egyptian people to rule. Against all
propaganda that it would bring theocracy have proven to be wrong. It is now
acceptable even to its bitter enemies namely USA and Israel as the true and popularly
elected party of Egyptian people.

Its role
in bringing the Israeli-Palestinians conflict to a peaceful end has won her
laurels and appreciation of the international community. Democratic credentials
are the best weapon for internal and external goodwill. Democracy mirrors the collective will of the
people and thus emerges as an acceptable vehicle of peace, conciliation. It
brings about progress and uplift of a state through people’s chosen representatives.

We would counsel
the hawks in Pakistan’s political arena to tone down their aggressive rhetoric
and join the quest, mission and journey for a better and democratic Pakistan and
take part in the next elections with all the enthusiasm and sincerity they can
muster.

Saturday, December 1, 2012

I have made several visits to the Great Britain in the
recent and distant past. I could not convince myself all these years that this
country could have been the ruler of more than half of the world. But
irrespective of my belief, she was the dominant power of the world for over a
hundred years or so or roughly until the Second World War.

In 90s, it was polluted and dirty and during my visit in
December 2011, I found it much more environmentally squalid and unkempt. The
degradation of the environment in UK is escalating without any tangible
remedies to contain it. The atmospheric hygiene is poor. The streets remain
littered for days and weeks together without being cleaned. It is a common
scene to see water drains outside the houses choked by stray papers, odd trash items,
causally thrown away plastic bags, bottles and wrappers. It might become a
third world country in due course.

If one compares the civic upkeep elsewhere in Europe like in
Germany and Austria, one would come across a bewildering contrast. Germany has
been rebuilt after the colossal devastation during the Second World War. The
autobahns (highways) between the major cities are modern, wide, properly lined
up with gas or fuel stations all along. The face lifting and landscaping is all
over the country. The zoning laws are in place and strictly enforced.

But in England one fails to find that sparkling touch and luminous
spectacle in cities and on roads and highways on a huge scale. One would find the
familiar sight of cows grazing along the inter-cities highways on lush green
grassy landscape far away. But within the cities the traffic looks to be stuffy
and. The traffic lights too are not as modern and plenteous as for instance in the
United States.

The streets lights look to be dim and sparsely installed on
roads in the cities. The cab and private drivers take liberty with traffic laws
by jumping the signals or fast driving or parking at forbidden or no parking
places. This kind of law breaking is not common but happens sparingly and at
odd times.

The British society is essentially conservative and
therefore, any change or transformation in the construction of buildings,
remodeling the public traffic system and buses is not willingly undertaken or
conceived. The outskirts of the cities are full of old taverns and restaurants
with their primitive designs dating back to several centuries.

The lamp posts on historical roads in downtown look like
relics and were perhaps erected with the discovery of electricity. Since the skies in the United Kingdom remain
overcast for better part of the year, there is a pervasive dampness. One feels
a kind of depression for not seeing the skies for days together.

One would aspire that the underground mass transit system of
local railway is updated and modernized. Also one would wish that the
double-decked bus transportation system too is done away with and the normal
sized buses with modern frame and latest internal gadgets are introduced.

The phenomenal difference in the overall picture of the
United States and the United kingdom is that USA looks all new with big
shopping plazas and housing
constellations fast coming up. In United States, the businesses, the shopping
centers and factory areas are separate from the residential areas. Barring the
apartment complexes, every built house or living unit is separate from other
houses.

It would be impossible under the American laws to open a
gift shop or small retail outlet in the parlor or garage of the house. In
England the houses share wall with each other as part of block. In England,
Scotland and other parts, the living or guest rooms can be converted into a kind
of kiosk for selling grocery times.

In Britain, the dirt and filth and smut accumulated in lanes
around the roads and on the walls of the buildings must be washed and erased
through a nationwide sweeping campaign. England has to overhaul its municipal
system drastically and radically to put on the grab of a modern society. In the
past such huge buildings with Gothic spires and domes were the symbols of the
imperial glory of a colonial power.

The House of Commons and also the House
of Lords accommodated within the vast edifice of Palace of Westminster have almost
the same internal format as at the time of their inception.

The
seating arrangement in perpendicular shape is unchanged for centuries. The
prime minister has to bend forward to speak and in four years may develop
leaning shoulders. The seats are smaller and joined together in rows. The parliament
buildings in other countries look like magnificent structures and striking
architectural monuments. But British parliament has the same primitive space
and set-up.

One would wonder if any British government ever would think
of constructing a new building for the parliamentarians of both the houses with
modern fittings, new seating arrangements, new tables, decorations, wall
hangings, microphones and with more space. Yet despite being housed in a traditional
old building, it still is one of the most powerful parliaments and pioneering
symbol of democracy.

In Glasgow the main city of Scotland, the railway stations
seems to be following the same system of collecting tickets from the
disembarked passengers by the collector standing at the tip the platform. In this
city I saw the building made of stone bearing the marks of soot, smoke and
blackness caused perhaps by the bombing during the Second World War.

In the houses of several of my acquaintances both native British
and immigrant Pakistanis, the bath tubs and water supply system with minor modifications
is the same as was prevalent several decades ago. The residents in some houses
collect the water from the tap in the basin. Unbelievably they use the same
water for washing face and gurgling and shaving. I wonder if someone can bear
me out on this phenomenon. At about 11 o’clock in the evening, a manual bell is
rung in the pubs for the customers to leave by which one is reminded that this
should have been the custom in olden days. This is yet another manifestation of
British penchant for conservatism.

Of late, the crime is on the rise. Even such worthies as late
jimmy Savile a former BBC television host had indulged for decades in molestation
of teen age participants in his TV programs as well as his staffers The street
crime is mostly motivated by the racial hatred for the immigrants, for sex or
to rob for money. The sex crimes too are proliferating in which both immigrant
communities and local citizens are involved. The fabled investigation agency
Scotland Yard is shorn of their luster and renown of the past. Many high
profile crimes are still shrouded in mystery and unresolved.

The nationals of the British Commonwealth countries had
enjoyed special privileges and preferential treatment with regard to visit or
immigration visas after the World War II. This practice continued for several
decades till the streets of cities in UK were conspicuous with sizable
presence of the foreigners.

The plight of most of the immigrants or expatriates is miserable.
Big families live in small units with limited space. In some houses or the
apartments, I have seen the bath tub fixed in the kitchen. The toilet is in the
courtyard and one has to walk many steps to reach that isolated place.

The influx of foreign students has been quite heavy during
the past two decades. It was pretty easy for the students to get an admission
letter from genuine or private and mostly fake educational institutions in UK.
The embassy or the high commission would readily grant visa. These young persons
would pay heavy amounts to the schools and colleges run by crafty professional
businessmen. The basic purpose of most of these students was however, to get a
legal stay in UK for a good future. They would be associated with these schools
but would in due course find job and marry with a local girl for permanent
legal status.

Now these students are in big trouble. They are being
deported or sent back home in droves without even fulfilling the legal formalities.
Such is the decay and devaluation of the acclaimed justice system in England. There
seems to be a drastic halt in granting student visas to educational applicants from
Pakistan and other south “Asian countries whose citizens invariably aspire to
move to the green pasture like Great Britain. Instead of punishing the crook bosses
of these phony schools, the onus has fallen on the hoodwinked young aspirants who
came to UK legally for education with underlying motive of a legal stay.

There are localities and neighborhoods in various cities of
UK where there is exclusive and complete hold of the immigrants such as South Hall
in London. No one would believe on the first glimpse that these are the parts
of a western country. The sanitary conditions in such neighborhoods are
appalling. With heaps of garbage accumulated all over, with noise and din, with
strung dresses and utensils, and cooked food displayed openly with smell all
round can remind visitors the similar conditions back home.

Even in politics the immigrants are now demographically in
such numbers that they can elect their own member to the House of Commons. In
local elections the naturalized citizens have been elected. That shows the
grass-root and a genuine democratic culture embedded in the English society. The
ceremonies of a new prime minister taking over and the former leaving the 10
Downing Street is very simple and is total contrast to the extravagant
ceremonies witnessed in the third world countries.

About Me

Columnist/Analyst/ Former Diplomat.
After obtaining my master’s degrees in Urdu and English literature from Punjab University, I started my career by teaching in a college. Thereafter, I had a stint in the diplomatic service of Pakistan. Finally I landed in journalism, an occupation that I am wedded to for over 20 years now.
I am a strong believer in a civil society and staunch opponent of exploitation in all forms.